User talk:Extrema

User talk:74.14.105.113

Please consider removing the vandalism warning you placed on User talk:74.14.105.113. I believe you made a mistake as the user vandalized the Talk Page Talk:Edwin Venturi, not the article itself. He was already warned for this instance and altough vandalism is not tolerated, we need to be fair as the user already has a warning for it, and did not (at the time of this writing) commit any other instance of vandalism. Thank you. Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 01:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It's up to you. (BTW, please leave new messages at bottom of Talk pages, it's the standard). Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 10:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Just want to make a point that it is not a neutral point of view to not say things like they happen. When someone kills a person, that is murdering. One may kill an insect, one murders a human being. It is called homicide and the people who kill other people are by definition, murderers. Hitler, is a murderer for example, as are these people who kill innocent people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.102.75 (talk) 02:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not there are Afghanistan people who the South Koreans are justified or not is simply not a concern here. This really is not that difficult of a discussion. Let me simplify this:

Human A ends the life of Human B and it is against Human B's life, this is an act known as homicide. I don't care what the person's belief is, in order for any living being to exist in a community, there must be rules. One of the most basic rules, which set us apart from animals in the forest is that we may not take the life of another human without just cause. Just cause does not mean to disagree with someone, to punch someone, to cheat on someone, to attempt to convert someone's religious beliefs, etc. Ending someone's life is done as a punishment for the act of homicide. I dont care what the religious beliefs are there, if a woman disobeys her husband, murder is NEVER justified. It is ok to be open minded to other cultures, but when people are using animalistic, savage cultural beliefs to commit crimes, this is wrong and needs to be condemned by society in general. Wikipedia reports facts here however and so I am not calling for adding things such as murder in cold blood as that is not reporting facts as much as it is showing opinion. However, when a crime is committed, it should be reported as so. Any way you cut this one, these people were killed against their will. Whether for political reasons or not, they were murdered as part of an act which can only be defined as a crime in any civilized culture.

Furthermore, if one was to go so far to say they had nothing against the people they killed and instead, this was simply a message to the government and these people were pawns, then that is to say that what went on in the US during the times of slavery and civil rights was not murder. That is to say, the KKK and such people who were taking innocent African Americans out of their house at night and hanging them were not murdering them as much as they are making political statements. We all know that is far from the truth and that society cannot tolerate acts such as that. Furthermore, society has an obligation to not make it seem like it was not a crime. Society is obligated to report it and treat it like the crime that it was. It is no different than taking hostages by terrorists and murdering their hostages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.102.75 (talk) 01:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Once more - until I can prove that my opinion is better than the Afghani - this is not a pissing contest, this is a statement of fact. Again, people can come to your house and ask you to convert to whatever religion. That may make you angry with these people, but that DOES NOT GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO KILL THEM - PERIOD. If you are saying that you truly believe that attempting to convert people is equivalent to murder, you may be one of the most illogical people I have ever spoken with. I cant even begin to understand how you could make that argument. I understand the desire to be neutral, but to call the murders normal people responding in a normal way to a situation, you are being biased towards the terrorists. If these people did not commit a crime, then why do they not come and turn themselves in? Stand trial? Prove their case? Oh, I know why, because they murdered innocent people. Wow, what a concept, running from the law when you committed a crime. 68.47.102.75 01:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Tell me this: "Murder is generally distinguished from other forms of homicide by the elements of malice aforethought and the lack of justification." - Wikipedia

What is their justification and please tell me how their justification is considered the international definition of justification as you ask me to define the international definition of murder. Or perhaps this is more a philisophical argument you make, yet I implore you to philosophically define define justification as your description clearly differs from mine and the majority of civilization. Yes, I exclude people like them from civilization as they lack civilized behavior. Killing your fellow man because they make you mad does not benefit society and thus is not civilized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.102.75 (talk) 00:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)